An Historic Overview of the IAPG: The Beginnings of IAGP and its Later Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
- This paper gives a brief historic overview of IAGP. When the first International Congress of Group Psychotherapy was held in Toronto, Canada, in 1954, J L Moreno initiated the formation of the International Committee of Group Psychotherapy whose name was later changed to the International Council of Group Psychotherapy. At the fifth International Congress of Group Psychotherapy held in Zurich, Switzerland, in 1973, the name was again changed and the International Association of Group Psychotherapy (IAGP) was born. Approximately every third year since that time an International Congress has taken place at different cities around the world. At the Board Meeting during the sixteenth International Congress held in Sao Paulo, Brazil in 2007, it was decided to change the name to the International Association for Group Psychotherapy and Group Processes to reflect the larger interests of members. It will be under this name that the seventeenth International Congress will be held in Rome. In addition to the major International Congresses, Pacific Rim Regional Congresses and Regional Mediterranean Congresses have also been successfully organised, always attracting large numbers of participants. Since 1973 a number of subgroups have been formed for the different branches of Group Psychotherapy. The development of IAPG has been possible only because of the commitment of Board members and volunteers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.005 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".